"If we are unable to operate profitably from Philadelphia, we may need to significantly reduce our business at Philadelphia, or move that business to another of our hubs," US Airways said.

"Our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be harmed by an increase in airport rates and fees charged by Philadelphia International Airport in connection with, and following, the airport expansion."

Personal take: everything has a price even an airline hub. It looks like the PHL hub for US isn't as sacred as many thought. Although I would've thought US would reduce its PHL hub only if it merged with another carrier that has a neighboring hub.

"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981

Quoting PHLBOS (Thread starter):Personal take: everything has a price even an airline hub. It looks like the PHL hub for US isn't as sacred as many thought.

Absolutely. A business exists to make money. If the hub turns unprofitable, it is not out of the question that it will be eliminated, especially when facing high oil prices this year.

However, US has a very limited number of hubs (unlike DL or UA) and cannot close PHL without significant impacts to their network, so it does seem to be a lot of posturing at this point.

But I think this reinforces the fact that airlines prefer hubs where competition cannot grow due to some type of capacity restrictions (ORD, PHL, EWR, etc.). This keeps competition out, fares high, and hubs profitable. What is good for the airline is not necessarily good for the consumer, but this is a tough industry that struggles to make money on a consistent basis.

Quoting simairlinenet (Reply 1):This is just posturing. Delta made similar threats 1-2 years ago to move a substantial portion of traffic from Atlanta to Memphis. Did they? No. Would they have? Highly unlikely.

I bet PIT would make one heck of a bid to get them back. They had a hub at BWI at one time too, but WN is there now.

Furthermore, they could move some of the flights to DCA even though its slot restricted, they just picked up a number of those slots.

Delta drew down DFW, AA drew down BNA...so the precedent is there for an airline to 'vaporize' a hub. Not to say US would do the same to PHL, but it's just a matter of how tight the screws are put to them by the Airport Authority.

Posturing. Nothing more, nothing less. Close a top 5 market like PHL where you have a virtual fortress (ask WN) and be left with two 20-something market hubs. Mr. Parker must have fallen and hit his head unless he plans to buy AA.

"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein

I'm not so sure that it's all posturing. If expansion increases costs to the point where the hub isn't profitable they don't have much choice. There is also truth to the thought that they are protecting their niche. Who wouldn't? If anyone thinks this is a bluff look no farther than PIT.
US has some serious issues with their east coast hubs in the decade ahead. Both PHL and CLT are dreadful places to connect. While CLT is very nice and they have done a great job with what they have to work with, it was never built for the volumes it handles. The corridors are tight, the gate areas are tiny and the walking is extensive. The gate areas are so small that passengers actually clog the corridors even further slowing the flow of passengers attempting connections. Some travelers (myself included) avoid these hubs for those very reasons. At some point, major expansion will be required at both of these facilities. At that point the cost advantage US enjoys will evaporate. PHL is particularly troublesome due to it's location underneath some of the most crowded airspace in the country. In addition to the increased fees related to expansion, the increased cost of airspace related delays from even more traffic can do nothing but push US's hub costs even higher still.

Is the possibility of the FAA redesigning the airspace even on the table? Or is their essentially no airspace to redesign with WAS and NYC receiving preferrential treatment and PHL will always suffer? Why don't the city and US join together to put some pressure on the FAA.

You have to understand US' side of the argument. Yes, the airport should really have another runway but if 10 years from now PHL still faces the same airspace type of delays what good is the runway. I forget, does the runway also alleviate some of the taxi way issues? I know the proposed new B/C terminal would eliminate a number of the alley delays.

Quoting Flaps (Reply 7): Both PHL and CLT are dreadful places to connect.

PHL obviously wasn't designed as a hub, but few are in the US and it fares well when compared to other 'non-hub' hubs (EWR in particular). I've been through PHL many times, never had any severe delays (luck?) and find the security staff courteous and friendly. Not a problem.

The US MAN - PHL service apparently caters for quite a healthy level of O&D business travel and cargo (between the UK and PA, VA, DC and DE), but for the rest of us, it would make no difference if we were to connect in PIT or CLT.

1. If PHL builds a new runway, USAirways does not want to pay for it, and neither do the other airlines. I read one article where it wasn't just US objecting, but most of the other majors serving PHL as well.

2. US apparently feels its more profitable to operate a hub with constant delays if it keeps competition out as opposed to a hub that has fewer delays but more competition.

There was an interesting letter to the editor of the Philly Tribune yesterday from the PHL CEO. He criticized USAirways for their stand and hinted that USAirways set up their own study to support them, and not PHL as a whole. He also hinted that he would not pander to US just because they are the biggest carrier in PHL, as in his opinion PHL is much more important as a whole than just the hub airline. I say, good for him.

Quoting apodino (Reply 12):There was an interesting letter to the editor of the Philly Tribune yesterday from the PHL CEO. He criticized USAirways for their stand and hinted that USAirways set up their own study to support them, and not PHL as a whole. He also hinted that he would not pander to US just because they are the biggest carrier in PHL, as in his opinion PHL is much more important as a whole than just the hub airline. I say, good for him.

Good luck to him. I bet he would change his tune if PHL shared the same fate as PIT. PHL benefits greatly from having an airline hub there...even if US left and the capacity were backfilled by other airlines, the airport would still lose out on the profits generated by a hub schedule.

Ultimately I do not see US leaving PHL - as of now, they have no other option in the Northeast. Although it would be cool to see them flow some connections over PIT again.

Quoting simairlinenet (Reply 1): Delta made similar threats 1-2 years ago to move a substantial portion of traffic from Atlanta to Memphis.

Apples and oranges comparison; MEM was a much smaller hub for NW than ATL is for DL. When the DL/NW merger news first broke out; I, for one, knew that MEM's days as a hub were numbered.

Quoting milesrich (Reply 3):I bet PIT would make one heck of a bid to get them back.

The PIT hub was sacrificed due to US being in Chapter 11 (for the 2nd time) at the time AND the fact that they knew darn well that if it merged with ANY carrier at the time; its PIT hub would eventually be gone.

Unlike PIT, PHL has a much more O&D demand. IIRC, in its days as a US hub; the majority of passengers on those PIT flights were connecting.

Quoting D L X (Reply 11):People need to remember that PIT and PHL are as far apart as ATL and CVG.

You must be joking. A quick glance at a U.S. map shows the distance between ATL & CVG being noticably larger than the distance between PHL & PIT. Were you actually referring to ATL & MEM as opposed to CVG?

Quoting milesrich (Reply 3):They had a hub at BWI at one time too, but WN is there now.

The BWI hub was pulled down years ago. Its pulldown centainly helped WN expand its presence there. And again, that hub being fairly close to its PHL hub was starting to take its toll on US' overall operations back then... especially during the recession of the early 90s.

Anyway, I've stated this before and I was state it again. Just because an airport serves a major metropolitan city doesn't mean that having an airline hub there is an automatic birth-right. IF the demand for airline service exists at a given airport; then carriers (note the plural) will come in and fly the routes.

Should US drop its PHL hub due to this (the CEP fees), a merger w/another legacy carrier (no down to three) or liquidation (US dodged that bullet w/the HP merger back in 2005); trust me, other carriers will come in to pick up the routes that are indeed in demand.

"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981

Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 15):You must be joking. A quick glance at a U.S. map shows the distance between ATL & CVG being noticably larger than the distance between PHL & PIT. Were you actually referring to ATL & MEM as opposed to CVG?

Using your time estimates and the above-distances, I get an average speed of roughly 45 mph for PHL-PIT (not that any one would necessarily drive from airport to airport) vs. ATL-CVG average of 53 mph.

Most people I've spoken with that have driven between Phily and PIT; the average travel time (barring major traffic jams) is closer to 5 hours not 6.

Besides, DL has already started to gut its CVG hub (due to its relatively close proximity to the larger DTW hub) so its ultimate fate may very well be similar to what PIT presently is.

"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981

Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 19):Using your time estimates and the above-distances, I get an average speed of roughly 45 mph for PHL-PIT (not that any one would necessarily drive from airport to airport) vs. ATL-CVG average of 53 mph

Ok, I don't know why we are really getting into distances between cities but lets take a step back here. If you want to purely compare distances than the great circle is fine, however it is not applicable for driving. Goggle maps tells me it is 305 miles (5 1/2 hours) from PHL-PIT if you were to drive, which is much greater than the great circle distance.

Well we're getting 2 additonal wide body gates by S12 and by 2015 a new terminal should be built which give US ample amount of gates. Obviously they wouldn't bring everything at once. But long term we could handle it

25 usairways85
: While that is still something yet to be determine and something that *may* happen well in the future PHL would likely up like BOS where you have more

26 PHLBOS
: The distances between cities (airports more specifically) was brought into the picture with regards to how close a hub of a LARGE airline can be to a

27 flylku
: Doesn't PHL get a larger share their largest aircraft? I am curious how PHL matches CLT on number of seats per day. It is still smaller, I'm sure, bu

28 usairways85
: Gates are only one piece of the puzzle, however if I understand correctly CLT is just about maxed out on gates. I've heard CLT has started to face so

29 southwest737500
: Your wright in that. But CLT is no where near PHL in terms of delays. Yes of course when that 6:00 push comes things get a little congested but it ha

30 USAirALB
: PHL best be considering this project very, very seriously. But when CLT wants to start building Terminal 2 (Concourse F), will US object to that? I ag

31 bjorn14
: US would be cutting off their nose despite their face. The airspace situation might change when the NextGen ATC comes online in about 2022. US could

32 PHLBOS
: All the E-170/175s are flown by Republic under the US Express banner. In terms of number of flights (as opposed to seats); I'm guessing that ZW has t

33 flylku
: I would be shocked if it happened. But, reducing dependence on PHL by shifting to other hubs is a possibility. Also, a merger of some sort would infl

34 D L X
: Come on. We all know Doug Parker would never AAllow his AAirline to merge with AAnother.

35 HPRamper
: It's just posturing by US. It would be akin to PMCO threatening to pull out of EWR. Not really a viable option. And with all respect to Dayton, it wa

36 mah584jr
: If US left, I think a carrier like B6 would swoop in in a second. Where is US going to go that would provide a better alternative? US needs PHL a lot